Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Chhagan Lal Chhagna vs State Of Rajasthan (2025:Rj-Jd:2693) on 15 January, 2025

[2025:RJ-JD:2693]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Criminal Misc. Appli No. 494/2024

Chhagan Lal Chhagna, R/o Tasvariya, Police Station Gulabpura,
District Bhilwara.
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                     Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
                                                                  ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)          :     Mr. Pravin Vyas.
For Respondent(s)          :     Mr. Vikram Singh Rajpurohit.



               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN MONGA

Order (Oral)

15/01/2025

1. The applicant is before this Court seeking modification of the

order dated 07.08.2024, passed by this Court in S.B. Criminal

Revision Petition No. 873/2005, vide which, his revision petition

was partly allowed.

2. Heard.

3. At the outset, given the conduct of the petitioner and the

role attributed to him, I am of the view that he is entitled to the

benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.

4. For the ready reference, the said Section 4 is reproduced

hereinbelow:-

"4. Power of Court to release certain offenders on probation of good conduct. -

(1) When any person is found guilty of having committed an offence not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and the Court by which the person is found guilty is of opinion that, having regard to the circumstances of the case including the nature of the offence and the character of the offender, it is expedient to release him on probation of good conduct, then,

[2025:RJ-JD:2693] (2 of 5) [CRLMA-494/2024]

notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Court may, instead of sentencing him at once to any punishment direct that he be released on his entering into a bond, with or without sureties, to appear and receive sentence when called upon during such period not exceeding three years, as the Court may direct, and in the meantime to keep the peace and be of good behaviour:

Provided that the Court shall not direct such release of an offender unless it is satisfied that the offender or his surety, if any, has a fixed place of abode or regular occupation in the place over which the Court exercises jurisdiction or in which the offender is likely to live during the period for which he enters into the bond.

(2) Before making any order under sub-section (1), the Court shall take into consideration the report, if any, of the probation officer concerned in relation to the case. (3) When an order under sub-section (1) is made, the Court may, if it is of opinion that in the interests of the offender and of the public it is expedient so to do, in addition pass a supervision order directing that the offender shall remain under the supervision of a probation officer named in the order during such period, not being less than one year, as may be specified therein, and may in such supervision order impose such conditions as it deems necessary for the due supervision of the offender.

(4) The Court making a supervision order under sub-section (3) shall require the offender, before he is released, to enter into a bond, with or without sureties, to observe the conditions specified in such order and such additional conditions with respect to residence, abstention from intoxicants or any other matter as the Court may, having regard to the particular circumstances, consider fit to impose for preventing a repetition of the same offence or a commission of other offences by the offender.

(5) The Court making a supervision order under sub-section (3) shall explain to the offender the terms and conditions of the order and shall forthwith furnish one copy of the supervision order to each of the offenders, the sureties, if any, and the probation officer concerned."

5. In the aforesaid context, reference may be had to a

judgment rendered in the case titled Nasri Vs. State of Haryana

: CRM-A-38-MA-2017, which was incidentally authored by me

when I was puisne Judge in the Punjab and Haryana High Court,

relevant extract whereof, is reproduced as under:-

[2025:RJ-JD:2693] (3 of 5) [CRLMA-494/2024]

"Probation can thus also be termed as an alternative form of punishment envisaged within the criminal justice system. In my opinion, following principles or what can be termed as potential benefits of release on probation ought to be kept in mind by the learned sentencing Courts below for exercise of judicial discretion to grant probation, provided a deserving case is made out.

a) Nature of the Offense: The severity and type of offense committed by the individual are important considerations. Less serious offenses, such as non-violent crimes or violent but arising out of self defense or first time offenses, might make an individual more eligible for probation.

b) Individualized Justice: Before grant of the benefit of release on probation, one has to take into consideration the individual circumstances of the offender viz., the nature of the crime vis-a-

vis the potential for positive change. It allows for tailored sentencing that considers the unique needs and characteristics of the offender, promoting a more just and proportionate response to the offense.

c) Criminal History: A convict's prior criminal history must be assessed to determine if they have a pattern of repeat offenses. A history of violent or serious crimes might make an individual less likely to be granted probation.

d) Rehabilitation Potential: The offender's willingness and potential to rehabilitate play a significant role. If there's evidence that the individual is committed to changing their behavior, participating in counseling, and addressing the underlying causes of their criminal activity, they ought to be considered for probation.

e) Compliance with Probation Terms: Convicts on probation are required to follow specific conditions, such as regular reporting to a probation officer, avoiding criminal activity, and attending counseling or rehabilitation programs. A person's willingness and ability to comply with these terms would influence their eligibility for probation.

f) Preventing Recidivism:- Probation, as an alternative to incarceration, can indeed help prevent first-time offenders from becoming habitual or "hardened" criminals. By providing rehabilitation and support services, probation aims to address the underlying factors that contribute to criminal behaviour, giving offenders a chance to change their ways.

g) Community Ties: An assessment of offender's ties to the community, such as family, employment, and stable housing ought to be carried out. Strong community ties can indicate a support system that can help prevent further criminal activity.

[2025:RJ-JD:2693] (4 of 5) [CRLMA-494/2024]

h) Risk to Public Safety: The safety of the community is a crucial factor. Assessments are made to determine whether releasing an individual on probation poses a low risk of committing new offenses or harming others.

i) Reducing Overcrowding:- Probation can help alleviate the overcrowding of jails and prisons. Non-violent offenders who are eligible for probation can be kept under community supervision, freeing up space in correctional facilities for more serious offenders.

j) Promoting productivity:- By allowing offenders to remain in the community and engage in productive activities such as work, education, or community service, probation can contribute to making them productive members of society. This, in turn, can lead to them contributing as taxpayers instead of being a burden on the State.

k) Second chance and Reformation:- Probation offers a second chance to offenders by allowing them to avoid imprisonment and providing an opportunity for reformation. Through counselling, treatment, and supervision, offenders can address the root causes of their criminal behaviour and work towards positive change.

l) Reintegration into Society: Probation allows offenders to maintain ties with their families, jobs and communities, which can enhance their chances of successful reintegration after their sentence. This reduces the likelihood of recidivism and helps break the cycle of criminal behaviour.

m) Compensation to the aggrieved: Court can even ask the offender to pay compensation (by way of penalty) to the aggrieved person as means of retribution or penance as a pre condition of release on probation.

n) Probation Officer Assessment: Probation officer may be asked by a court to conduct an assessment of the offender to gather information about their background, behavior, and potential for rehabilitation. Such an assessment would help take an informed decision regarding probation.

o) Judicial Discretion: In the end, depending on facts and circumstances of the case, it is the discretion of court to determine whether to grant probation. It shall consider all relevant factors and balance the interests of rehabilitation, public safety, and justice in the decision-making process. The goal of probation is to offer an alternative to incarceration that addresses the individual needs of the offender while maintaining public safety."

[2025:RJ-JD:2693] (5 of 5) [CRLMA-494/2024]

6. In view of the aforesaid position, I am of the view that given

the concept of recidivism read with rehabilitation as well as

reintegration of an offender into society, the prayer of the

petitioner seems to be fair. Accordingly, the same is allowed. The

petitioner shall be treated on probation.

7. Accordingly, the petitioner shall be treated to have got the

benefit of probation upon the expiry of the period of first six

months, with consequences to follow.

8. The instant application is disposed of accordingly.

(ARUN MONGA),J 85-SKM/Mohan

Whether fit for reporting : Yes / No